Hello,
My name is Michael Lieberman. I posted here a year or two ago when I
was in production of my documentary film "The Drift." At the time, I
posted fundraising and budget concerns/thoughts, which were quite
helpful.

I thoroughly enjoyed the Fair Use discussion, issues of which I am
currently dealing with and worried about. In "The Drift", many times I
interviewed the subject, an Iraq War veteran, as he was in transit (in
a car) or near his computer playing music. I never wanted to use the
music, but the interviews literally hold the film together. The Center
for Social Media PDF file was very helpful, but then I read
contradictory reports about other films where directors had to secure
rights for cell phone ring tones in the background. Where does the
truth lie about this? The total budget for this film was about as much
as it costs for a teenager's used car. What to do?

Another separate thought: In one scene, the Iraq vet made a video for
a class of his, using music from "The Simpsons" soundtrack and a
speech from Oppenheimer. Would using this, where the intent by the
subject of my film used it to further his ideas, count as me capturing
copyrighted media contact in the process of filming something else,
i.e. the reactions to his project?

I must add that this community is invaluable. Without it, I'd really
have nowhere to go for concerns I've had as a documentary filmmaker.

First of all I got a question. Any one familiar and or have worked
with Current TV?

We are an upcomming documentary production company/collective called
Transnational Productions based in Europe (at the moment London, and
South Germany). Our main goal is to make films concerning diaspora
and culture, eventhough we are developing new ideas as we go along on
a daily basis.

We also will like to approach filmmakers interested in contacting us
for possible working together etc... as we are open to
suggestions/share cooperation and already have a few contacts world
wide, which by the way it is the main reason why we appreciate this
site.

For example, one of our friends currently went to Thailand and Burma
to shoot a documentary and we provide her with contact information to
rent some equipment she needed for her to shoot there. We also need
some support in logistics as we can offer filmmakers our logistic
contacts.

We are developing different kinds of contacts from production to
commissioning editors. We will like to develop a contact list as we
go along so we can exchange our experience/expertise equally.

We are also in the process of contacting European networks
Commissioning Editors, a difficult task but non the less exciting and
very productive.

Efren, it's only open to individuals, not companies, but you're
welcome to join our professional community: www.d-
word.com/community/join. Michael, you seem far enough along with your
experience to be eligible, too. You're far more likely to get answers
to your questions there.

Hey guys, kinda new here. Lol I'll just post the email question to save the flavor of the question:

Hi there,

I'm a high school student in the Philippines making a documentary on
the value of teenage love and the value of chastity. I would like to
ask for some basic advice on making a documentary. I'd be glad to
credit you for the advice in the end. =)

There's five people to interview, and I have couple of 1 CCD cameras.
The documentary can't exceed 12 minutes. Do you think it's a good idea
to make the documentary an entire interview? What about reenactments?
Do you have other ideas on how to make the documentary more
interesting?

Thanks for your time reading this,
Keith

P.S. Sorry for the informality of the letter, I happen to be very candid!

Vincent,
The answer to your question is, as always, "it depends". If you have five people who give wonderfully poignant interviews with strong sound bites, they yes, you can probably go ahead and make the entire project nothing more than talking heads (e.g. Errol Morris' FOG OF WAR). However, if you have a character actually going through the struggle of remaining chaste, it might be more compelling to film him/her in the moment. I generally frown upon reenactments b/c they are so rarely done well (especially by first-time filmmakers) and they usually look terribly fake. Animation is something that's becoming a lot more prevalent and an interesting way of presenting an event that's already happened. Try looking at a bunch of different documentaries -- then pick and choose from certain styles you like that would best fit your film. Ultimately, the film has to be a reflection of what is most significant and striking to you.

I think a documentary needs more than talking heads. Errol Morris is also the king of re-enactments and even his talking heads are filmed with a very distinctive style (interrotron).

Teenagers talking about chastity? I want to see more than their heads. I want to see what they're talking about, if at least in an abstract way. Maybe, create their points of view in school or on the streets, looking at people, thinking about them. Maybe don't even show the interviewees. There's a reason it's a film and not a radio show, so let's see some compelling visuals..

Vincent, if you can get your hands on an American documentary called THE EDUCATION OF SHELBY KNOX, it demonstrates one approach to a similar topic (it's actually broader than just the chastity issue, but that is one issue covered in the film).

Hey thanks guys for the information. I'll definitely use them in my documentary. =)

I'll be interviewing all five people in their dormitories. They're all in college. Do you think that's a good idea? They all definitely aren't chaste! Lol The thought of just having an interview with just some reenactments worry me.

The Documentary Film competition aims to get an in-depth view of
what the youth think, feel and say, especially with regard to human
sexuality. This will help the congress organizers, as well as parents
and educators, see where the youth are coming from. This will also
aid them in having a good picture of the dreams, ideals, and
struggles the youth are facing in our current society.

Actually I just copied and pasted the last paragraph. What do you think is the ideal number of people to be interviewed? There's a Japanese guy, a girl from Hongkong, a lesbian, a gay person, and two "normal" people. I'm choosing the Japanese guy, the two homosexuals, and one "normal" person. This would probably represent everyone fairly well. What do you guys think about this?

Sorry for this quick line, but you have to take care when choosing your interviewees Vincent to how good they are as interviewees, how talkative, how focused and precise in what they say, how capable are they of capturing the viewers interests, etc...
I am curious now to know what makes the Japanese guy and the Hong Kong Girl different than the normal people? Do you mean your fellow country people?? If so, that explains...

Besides, other than enactments or animation, you might just film footage of those guys and girls lives. I mean their sexuality is part of their life (and lifestyle) after all, or isn't it?

I've done some work that involves interviewing people about their sexuality. Here's my advice, for whatever it's worth.

Mostly people never have the chance to express themselves candidly, to a stranger, about their sexuality and sexual experience. If you create the right environment, it can be an incredibly validating, probabably unpresidented experience for your subjects.

Let people tell the story they want to tell, even if it seems to be pretty fair afield from your objectives, or what you think your objectives are for the film. Be patient, listen, as best you can try to understand why your subject has choosen to reveal themselves to your in such an intimate way. No one agrees to be recorded talking about such a personal subject unless they feel like they have something important to share, something that outweighs the risks. Even if they can't articulate it, your subjects will have an agenda. Figure out what it is, help them express themselves.

If your lucky, you find points of tangency or even overlap with your agenda. The interview becomes a dialog (even if only one side ever makes it to the screen) When you find that, the sparks will fly! The footage you get will be good as gold!

To clarify: i didn't mean that 5 was too many to interview, you can interview as many as you want to or can afford to. i was saying that for a 12 minute finished film, i think 5 is too many to follow. unless all 5 are super strong - but in the end you'll see that some are just stronger than other on the screen. plus, it's only once you have all those interviews will you see what the recurring themes are or how to play one off another.

i would also, like niam, suggest that you film them going about their daily routine, the people they meet, dates they have, classes they take, social settings, parties, clubs, extra-curricular activities etc. this will later be a gold mine for you to use over whatever they are saying in the interview.

I think the number of subjects or characters you can present in a give amount of time is going to vary tremendously from project to project, and is going to depend a lot on your own skills and objectives as a filmmaker. One of my best films was a scant 9 minutes long, and featured seven subjects, selected from perhaps 30 interviews. My latest film is 54 minutes long and has only two subjects, interviewed simultaniously.

Again I can't help but think of the idea of tangency and overlap, only this time between what you think the finished film is supposed to be and the film the universe want you to make. You can't cede control to fate, but neither can you can ignore the life a project will take on of its own accord â€“ nor would you want to!

Ultimately, a film's "will to be" is you best ally. As much as you should strive to be in a dialog with your subjects, you should hope to find yourself in a dialog with your film. When/if that happens, the film will tell you the right way to arrange your elements at least as much as you will decide.

My professional training is in commercial photography, especially larger-format products and interiors. It's an approach that allows for an exacting control of every detail of the frame that I don't think even the biggest budget features can achieve, let alone the little indie docs I produce. I am entirely self-taught, and anything I (think I) know is merely a recitation of my experience, and nothing more.

And even though I've been doing this for more than a decade now, every single outing reminds me (often in the most brutal fashion) how little control I have over the process of making a film, that the best I can do is try to set a few things in motion, and then be watchful for the happy accidents that (hopefully!) result.

But no way do I mean to imply that careful planning and rigorous craftsmanship are of lessor value. If anything you'll need to bring the very best you can muster to this project, especially considering the subject matter. There will be people will look for any excuse to dismiss your work as exploitive, pandering, sensationalist. A finely, passionately crafted film will be your best defense against these attacks.

I am in the middle of editing my first feature-length documentary about the destruction of the oldest drive-in theater in the state of Illinois ("Hi-Lite's Last Gleaming" is the documentary's name). A lot of the story is told through the headlines of the local paper, so I am fascinated by the various techniques that are used to make headlines "come alive". Specifically, ones where the headline is shown and then a sentence is highlighted and scrolls in front of the image. Can anyone help me with what program is best used to get that effect? I have the entire Adobe Production suite, so I assume that I can format this is in Photohsop and then import it into Premiere Pro, but I'd love to know how others have achieved this effect (or other ways to dramatize newspaper shots).

If you're up for a challenge, you can play around with the stereoscopic effect made famous in "The Kid Stays in the Picture" -- also very doable with some time, After Effects and Photoshop. And while you figure it out, you might even stumble on something cool and new that no one's seen before...

I'm heading to the Ukraine in two weeks to shoot a doc on my dad who is visiting the monastary he was hidden in as a child during WWII. I've been working in the film industry for 16 years as a steadicam op/direcotor so mechanics wise I'm feeling good, but having never made a doc, I'm a bit freaked out about easy mistakes I can avoid as a first timer. Any siggestions would be great. Also, can someone point me to a short/simple release form I can bring?